Fukushima Daiichi Worker Explains Un-analyzed Risks In Unit 1 Spent Fuel Removal

Fukushima worker Happy wrote extensively yesterday on Twitter about what he sees as some considerable risks with the upcoming work to remove the spent fuel from unit 1.

These risks are similar to concerns our research team has had related to unit 4’s spent fuel removal. In that case no technical details had been given out on the defueling building and its ability to hold the massive weight from the spent fuel casks and defueling cranes. It is an even bigger issue at unit 1.

Happy mentions that the foundation of unit 1’s reactor building can not be inspected due to the high radiation. Previous work documented by TEPCO showed lethal radiation levels in the suppression chamber room at various points around the building. Without the ability to inspect the foundation and lower portions of the building it can not be determined that the building itself can hold up the additional weight of casks and new cranes.

He also explains the issues with the current building cover over unit 1. The current cover has an expanded steel frame with fabric panels installed over to attempt to keep radioactive dust and gasses contained and run through a filtration system. The cover was put up quite quickly in response to the leaking from unit 1. This frame is nowhere near as robust as the one used for defueling at unit 4 and could not support the cranes and spent fuel casks needed to do the work at unit 1.

Even if TEPCO goes with a more robust building, no technical details proving the design of the unit 4 type building have been released to the public. It is unknown how extensively that design has been reviewed. With TEPCO’s track record of poorly executed work projects it does raise considerable concern. Such a plan would still need some basis to understand the true condition of the reactor building’s structure and seismic resistance.

Unit 1 frame for tent cover
Unit 4 defueling building
Unit 4 defueling building

 

Machine translated run of tweets from Happy11311:

The longer a little today, but it could tweet without permission impression that saw the medium-to long-term road map that was presented at (6/10) decommissioning measures Promotion Council the other day. It was thought oiler to see news first, “this time,? Did announced in a big way to use the mass media the process was ahead of schedule a year and a half why” is I’m was wondering really. Connection 1: medium-and long-term roadmap is created in the country subject, you are out every month, but until now, was announced to use a big way to the Civil Code TV I do not too much memory. Well, fuel debris is removed I do not may be because was ahead of schedule in a year and a half …. Even so, I was … I thought The two continued: a …, looking at the contents, I’m title line of the process does not understand me tremendously “main schedule of a basis of study for … medium-and long-term roadmap revised” first. I’m super-draft process that is “draft of a process meeting for” To put it simply. It used to be one main line So … why this uncertain process is what came out what the contents are uncertain even … until now to do I announced properly construction methods since confirmed Nante process: continuous 3 ? It, I think I had to be mentioned publicly the achievements made decommissioning measures Promotion Council first. Continued 4: To solemnly declare that Motegi Economy, Trade and Industry Minister make by June a road map of Unit each, and ordered, another reason there was announced to be considered a process for the result is not If you do not issue a process anyway I think there’s a. You get to know people in the course disclose information I need such things, but how to … announcement. The connection 5: I felt the performance “country’ll have doing it thought firmly that of 1F convergence in principal we” ‘s, and mass media from resulting in close-up a year and a half ahead of schedule process and see coverage, the process I wonder whether it be they’re giving the public the impression is ahead of schedule, as determined … or else. Because he ‘felt so OIRA also viewed news: continued 6. But nothing so I do not yet decided If you take a closer look at the contents of the roadmap document. For example, I think I have a plan of three fuel debris removal of Unit 1, but OIRA will become ③ plan any way you slice it. In other words, I, such that ‘s not a process ahead of schedule. Continued 7: I can not write the whole thing in a lot of reasons other plan or not satisfied why, but I will be briefly described for the time being. Plan ① I such that ‘s to implement the spent fuel taken out by remodeling the existing building cover, but time-consuming, and it’ s not existing cover which I made with such a plan originally … That modify or re-use that is difficult After demolition debris removal at the time of the spent fuel taken out before: continued 8. And then process also has not been shortened plan ① …. However, this plan I think Ann out costs and do not break the most in three. The problem is I plan ② What you have process ahead of schedule … I do a plan to build and put the top container (cover) to Opefuro No. 1 building of existing, but I’m there is a problem of earthquake resistance of the building of Unit 1 first: This connection 9. Unit 1 is not anti-seismic evaluation yet, and I doubt a far more detailed seismic estimates may be possible. This I have to say in the conference .. The connection 10: Would you recommend it? I do not have to look everywhere, such as walls and floors and foundation pillar in order to seismic evaluation, but where copper can not go even if the decontamination and processing debris or to check is always a place where you can not go in the high-dose really I think with. TEPCO but is taking out the decontamination plan in the building … Continued 11: the content shall be shielded and to decontamination methods in a variety of floor and wall, equipment, piping and debris removal of the high-dose. But, I think problem of high-dose area is not to resolve not only it. I think it was before I muttered atmosphere dose will not fall and they must be filled with water the pipe with clean water by flushing system also piping. I think likely to be firmly seismic evaluation to be low: So after another 12. Things to it that make the Opefuro on the top container, foundation pillar of the top container because taking space, work efficiency is bad area you want to work that much becomes narrower. Higher-up ‘s work efficiency so I do not think too much me. Continued 13: Unit 1 to narrow even … just. Person who could use widely absolutely Given the working efficiency of the after after’m supposed to go smooth process also. Another worry is that the weight of the upper container What Causes of how much including crane equipment. Continued 14: weight of things such as cask lifted by a crane and steel weight of this container It costs directly to the building. Depending on the results of the seismic evaluation but …, steel original Unit 1 Opefuro I light compared to the other machine. And I think I understand well If you look at photos after the explosion of before applying cover … I’m not a concrete pillar thick like other machine is connected Opefuro of 15:1 Unit. It may be that because such initial plant of more than 40 years ago, but I’ve been made with a light steel anyway. So if the top container is heavier than steel weight of the original, What worries me … I wonder if all right. Within this, I chose the oiler plan ③ For the above reasons: continued 16. This means that it ‘s not process plan ahead of schedule. Future, I continue to consider technology development plan and fuel debris extraction method while assessment of the situation and study but then some possibility of using quite a heavy object such as a steel shielding to Opefuro on by the contents … The lighter even a little I’m good load on the building given the work of after after: continued 17. After, you’ll got to consider methods to study from now even rubble processing of Opefuro, but I do not know what to complete in about one year of this process planning. I think concerns about extending the process like Unit 3 is high. So I do think of you do not see the water surface of the pool to the spent fuel pool in the explosion, continue 18:1 Unit because I dropped a lot of rubble, to recover that’s very substantial. Anyway, convergence work in the future to study, I do not know Nante step from just that you do not know if you do not try. Continued 19: So, the willl roadmap This I such that ‘s not something you have established and determined be one wishful plans and goals and the last. Process of one year before any though not confirmed, I do not because you should be able to determine thing including seven years earlier. I hope to be walking alone ahead of schedule only process one and a half years …. Connection: 20 is closed up the process ahead of schedule the press only that, I take pressure in various forms on the scene. Site also methods improvement, work efficiency, workforce planning, production time, I consider closely the cost, and so of course I 1F convergence work, I’m afraid of tit-for-tat because come whenever you plan in Ki Yes process. Connection: 21 site I think that you work diligently to ensure the safety will lead to reduction process as a result. When it is a process not afford last-minute from the beginning, and pull to impossible being chased by step, impatient, to injury, the hand, I never manage to be good for me sloppy. Anyway diligently safety-site,! Could. Today, I was going to come 2F stabilization center in the meeting work. Out to I’m at.

This article would not be possible without the extensive efforts of the SimplyInfo research team
Join the conversation at chat.simplyinfo.org

© 2011-2018 SimplyInfo.org, Fukuleaks.org All Rights Reserved Content cited, quoted etc. from other sources is under the respective rights of that content owner. If you are viewing this page on any website other than www.simplyinfo.org (or www.fukuleaks.org) it may be plagiarized, please let us know. If you wish to reproduce any of our content in full or in more than a phrase or quote, please contact us first to obtain permission.

Editor

Editor, SimplyInfo.org

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.